IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i4p490-d1372771.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Second-Round Effects of the Agriculture Value Chain on Farmers’ Land Transfer-In: Evidence from the 2019 Land Economy Survey Data of Eleven Provinces in China

Author

Listed:
  • Qiang Jin

    (College of Economics and Management, China Agricultural University, No. 17 Tsinghua East Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Yanjing Guo

    (Shandong Academy of Social Sciences, No. 56 Shungeng Road, Shizhong District, Jinan 250002, China)

  • Hui Dang

    (College of Economics and Management, China Agricultural University, No. 17 Tsinghua East Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China
    Faculty of Business Foreign Language, Shanxi University of Finance and Economics, No. 140 Wucheng Road, Taiyuan 030006, China)

  • Junfeng Zhu

    (College of Economics and Management, China Agricultural University, No. 17 Tsinghua East Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Kahaer Abula

    (Business School, Xinjiang Normal University, No. 100, Guanjing Road, Shuimogou District, Urumqi 830017, China)

Abstract

In the context of the separation of three rights of land and agricultural modernization, this paper is based on the land economic survey data from eleven provinces in China in 2019, covering the eastern, middle, and western regions of China. Based on the value chain theory and its “second-round effect”, which pertains to the multi-round effects of value chain distribution theory, various research methods such as Probit, Tobit, the two-part model, SFA, PSM, and the intermediary effect model are employed to analyze the direct impact of the agriculture value chain (AVC) on farmers’ land factor inputs and the income effects caused by them, which are the “second-round effect” of the AVC on land factor inputs. The research results show the following: Firstly, the AVC has a significant positive impact on the behavior and area of farmers’ land transferring-in, which helps guide farmers towards large-scale land operation. Secondly, the AVC significantly improves farmers’ production efficiency and promotes land transfer through differences in production efficiency, representing the “second-round effect” mechanism of the AVC on land factor inputs. Moreover, the AVC will increase farmers’ net land production income by 48.74%, which is the “second-round effect” of the AVC on farmers’ agricultural income and also the motivation for farmers’ land factor inputs. Finally, the expansion of land area and the improvement of production efficiency jointly increase farmers’ agricultural income, among which production efficiency plays a partial intermediary effect in increasing agricultural income if farmers join the AVC. This paper believes that we should further promote the market-oriented reform of land factors, support the innovation of the benefit linkage mechanism of the AVC, and promote appropriate areas of land operation by farmers, thereby achieving common prosperity and promoting agricultural modernization in China.

Suggested Citation

  • Qiang Jin & Yanjing Guo & Hui Dang & Junfeng Zhu & Kahaer Abula, 2024. "The Second-Round Effects of the Agriculture Value Chain on Farmers’ Land Transfer-In: Evidence from the 2019 Land Economy Survey Data of Eleven Provinces in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:4:p:490-:d:1372771
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/4/490/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/4/490/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xianqing Ji & Zhonghao Qian & Linxiu Zhang & Tonglong Zhang, 2018. "Rural Labor Migration and Households' Land Rental Behavior: Evidence from China," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 26(1), pages 66-85, January.
    2. Michael R. Carter & Yang Yao, 2002. "Local versus Global Separability in Agricultural Household Models: The Factor Price Equalization Effect of Land Transfer Rights," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(3), pages 702-715.
    3. Carter, Michael R, 1984. "Identification of the Inverse Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity: An Empirical Analysis of Peasant Agricultural Production," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(1), pages 131-145, March.
    4. Heath Henderson & Alan G. Isaac, 2017. "Modern Value Chains and the Organization of Agrarian Production," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(2), pages 379-400.
    5. Cragg, John G, 1971. "Some Statistical Models for Limited Dependent Variables with Application to the Demand for Durable Goods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 39(5), pages 829-844, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yuzhe Zhou & Zehui Wang & Wei Wang & Yulin Wang, 2025. "The Impact of Migrant Workers’ Return Behaviors on Land Transfer-in: Evidence from the China Labor Dynamic Survey," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-29, April.
    2. Zhijie Cao & Lingzhi Yan & Kexin Zhou & Ming Lei, 2024. "Willingness for Land Transfer and Coupling Coordination Analysis in Poverty Alleviation Resettlement Areas: A Sustainable Development Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-21, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Deng, Xin & Xu, Dingde & Zeng, Miao & Qi, Yanbin, 2019. "Does early-life famine experience impact rural land transfer? Evidence from China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 58-67.
    2. Zhang, Jian & Mishra, Ashok K. & Ma, Xianlei, 2023. "Mechanism of Chinese farmers’ land rental participation: The role of invisible markets and public intervention," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    3. Klaus Deininger & Songqing Jin, 2008. "Land Sales and Rental Markets in Transition: Evidence from Rural Vietnam," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 70(1), pages 67-101, February.
    4. Gong, Tengda, 2022. "Economic Impacts of Land Security Improvements: Investment Incentives versus Rental Incentives," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322094, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Dingde Xu & Zhuolin Yong & Xin Deng & Linmei Zhuang & Chen Qing, 2020. "Rural-Urban Migration and its Effect on Land Transfer in Rural China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-15, March.
    6. Chaozhu Li & Xiaoliang Li & Jiaxu Wang & Tianchu Feng, 2023. "Impacts of Aging Agricultural Labor Force on Land Transfer: An Empirical Analysis Based on the China Family Panel Studies," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-15, January.
    7. Chen, H., 2018. "Can Crop Insurance Market Benefit Land Rental Market by Mitigating the Inverse-Relationship Concern," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277003, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Songqing Jin & T. S. Jayne, 2013. "Land Rental Markets in Kenya: Implications for Efficiency, Equity, Household Income, and Poverty," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(2), pages 246-271.
    9. Kai Huang & Xin Deng & Yi Liu & Zhuolin Yong & Dingde Xu, 2020. "Does off-Farm Migration of Female Laborers Inhibit Land Transfer? Evidence from Sichuan Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-14, January.
    10. Chen, Huang, 2017. "Agricultural Risk, Insurance, and the Land-productivity Inverse Relationship," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258212, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Ufer, Danielle & Ortega, David L., 2022. "Right on the Money? U.S. Farmers Have a Varied Understanding of Consumer Preferences and Attitudes over Animal Welfare and Biotechnology," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322269, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. GAO Tianming & Anna Ivolga & Vasilii Erokhin, 2018. "Sustainable Rural Development in Northern China: Caught in a Vice between Poverty, Urban Attractions, and Migration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-20, May.
    13. Marcén, Miriam & Molina, José Alberto & Morales, Marina, 2018. "The effect of culture on the fertility decisions of immigrant women in the United States," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 15-28.
    14. Langyintuo, Augustine S. & Mungoma, Catherine, 2008. "The effect of household wealth on the adoption of improved maize varieties in Zambia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 550-559, December.
    15. repec:zbw:rwirep:0200 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Subir K. Chakrabarti & Srikant Devaraj & Pankaj C. Patel, 2021. "Minimum wage and restaurant hygiene violations: Evidence from Seattle," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(1), pages 85-99, January.
    17. Mastulah Kawala & Theodora Shuwu Hyuha & Ekere William & Peter Walekwa & Gabriel Elepu & Sloans Chimatiro Kalumba, 2018. "Determinants for Choice of Fish Market Channels: The Case of Busia (Uganda/Kenya) Border," Journal of Agricultural Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(8), pages 118-118, July.
    18. repec:osf:socarx:jnexr_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Torres, Marcelo de O. & Felthoven, Ronald G., 2014. "Productivity growth and product choice in catch share fisheries: The case of Alaska pollock," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PA), pages 280-289.
    20. Paul L. Burgess & Stuart A. Low, 1998. "How do Unemployment Insurance and Recall Expectations Affect on-the-job Search among Workers Who Receive Advance Notice of Layoff?," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 51(2), pages 241-252, January.
    21. Giuseppe Bertola & Luigi Guiso & Luigi Pistaferri, 2005. "Uncertainty and Consumer Durables Adjustment," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(4), pages 973-1007.
    22. Silvia Magri, 2014. "Does issuing equity help R&D activity? Evidence from unlisted Italian high-tech manufacturing firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(8), pages 825-854, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:4:p:490-:d:1372771. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.